Ok, my first problem with heroes is that despite having a heroic feat, and associated cliche, if you field any more than three heroes, you get a penalty that outweighs the benefits of having the three heroic feats per turn. If I wanted to run, say, an A-team squad, I would only be able to have Face, Hannibal and B.A. operating at full potential with Murdock at a disadvantage. My suggestion, although it may make heroes slightly imbalanced, is to allow only one of each cliche, so only one Terminator, or James Bond, or Indiana Jones themed hero, but so long as you can think an acceptable unique cliche, you can have as many heroes as you want.

My second problem is that Magikal, and Superpowered characters are less powerful than their heroic equivalent, but have a d12 instead of a d10, and thus have a higher CP cost. To remedy this, we could purchase Superpowers or magikal abilities as heroic feats. This would mean wizards are now limited in their numbers, but what if each school of magik is a cliche, so earth magik, fire magik, water magik, air magik, necromancy, explosionomancy, Magic Johnson, and Gandalf magic are all cliches, this means that a varied team of wizards or superheroes with different powers are now playable, so you could use the X-men, or the Avengers as bases for squads without the issue of heroic ego.

Any criticism or balancing that this could use?

This is the way the world ends.This is the way the world ends.This is the way the world ends.Not with a bang, but with a whimper.

Having no limit on the number of heroes is a bad idea. The reason that limit is in place is because heroes are so incredibly powerful for what they do. One feat can change the tide of a battle, and letting players have too many feats at their disposal will turn a battle into one of the childhood "I use x power, you stop my by using y, I stop that with z...." arguments. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but its not what Brikwars is usually about.

Superpowered characters, while not as powerful as heroes, are also more reliable, since your opponent can't roll to oppose your use of a supernatural die. That alone might justify the increased point cost, and the D12 is just icing on the cake.

If want to field large teams of stonger minifigs, there are ways to do that without resorting to heroes and supernatural dice. One option is to buy your units a few traits form the asses Voin and Rev. Sylvanus have compiled. As long as you don't go overboard, you should be fine, and those asses provide a good guideline to the cost and powers of any custom traits you decide to make. I have a few units like that, and they perform decently without being unfair, like I did here.

The other option would be to use heroic weapons/equipment (cap's shield, B.A's giant pile of gold jewelry, ect), since their isn't a limit on those and they're pretty cheap.

For the record, IVhorsemen has a great reference thread with traits and special abilities.

The other option would be to use heroic weapons/equipment (cap's shield, B.A's giant pile of gold jewelry, ect), since their isn't a limit on those and they're pretty cheap.

This is a great option because heroic equipment can be captured and used against you (which is often hilarious. Archaeologists fought my medieval army once, killed the wizard, took his staff, and started blasting me with spells.

Another option would be to give a nod to the rainbow knight heroes Stubby created and simply fiat that your Heroes aren't cranky so long as they are working together/as a team/with "noble" common goals.

Another option (i'm full of them tonight) would be to say you can field all the heroes, but the player is still limited to a single heroic feat per turn. This has the disadvantage of reducing available feats (obviously) but the advantage of a feat making use of multiple available cliches on the field.

loafofcheese wrote:If I wanted to run, say, an A-team squad, I would only be able to have Face, Hannibal and B.A. operating at full potential with Murdock at a disadvantage. My suggestion, although it may make heroes slightly imbalanced, is to allow only one of each cliche, so only one Terminator, or James Bond, or Indiana Jones themed hero, but so long as you can think an acceptable unique cliche, you can have as many heroes as you want.

I don't really think any of those guys fit the mold of a BrikWars-style Hero. A Hero is just about himself, not about teamwork.

THERE'S NO HERO IN TEAM

B.A. = Mechanik HeavyMurdock = PilotHannibal = OfficerFace = ???

The closest class for Face is probably the Cheerleader thing we've been working on since forever but still haven't come up with a name for. Or maybe just a regular minifig with some SuperNatural Charisma dice.

Rev. Sylvanus wrote:Another option would be to give a nod to the rainbow knight heroes Stubby created and simply fiat that your Heroes aren't cranky so long as they are working together/as a team/with "noble" common goals.

That turned out to be a bad idea. I was only able to make it work by always making sure there was a different player for each knight. In the end, it's still best with one Hero per player, even if they're on the same team.

Alternatively, it could work with an Order of Succession / Chain of Command sort of way, where only the most "senior" Hero for each Player gets to use a Feat (or initiate a group Feat) in a turn.

For extra fun, Heroes who are further down the line of succession could get an Instant Benny for each Hero who was incapacitated (in that turn) to make them the most senior Hero.

Ex: Suppose a team has Heroes A through E. Hero A is killed by the Enemy, leading B to become the senior Hero and get an Instant Benny. B uses that Instant Benny to good effect, winning much acclaim and inspiring jealousy in E. The next turn, E kills B, C, and D, gaining three Instant Bennies.